|
Post by someNOTHING! on Nov 11, 2019 18:20:48 GMT -5
Sure, many masters do point to the dream as being a reality of sorts, butt it's not realized as that . Well, it's not realized as anything. If it were realized as anything, it would be a thing. The dream is an extremely common pointer. I bet there's some Zen story about this somewhere. <aaahem>
|
|
|
Post by siftingtothetruth on Nov 11, 2019 19:59:43 GMT -5
Well, it's not realized as anything. If it were realized as anything, it would be a thing. The dream is an extremely common pointer. I bet there's some Zen story about this somewhere.How much do you want to lay out?
|
|
|
Post by siftingtothetruth on Nov 11, 2019 19:59:53 GMT -5
Well, it came to your mind. The idea of the dream is also clearly a pointer. Whatever is realized is beyond words -- so beyond words that it cannot even be said to be beyond words. Actually what is realized destroys even the concept of realization. Who says simple is better than so-called multi-layered? Doesn't it depend on the circumstance? “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.” Who said that? HL Mencken
|
|
|
Post by siftingtothetruth on Nov 11, 2019 20:03:55 GMT -5
To bicker about pointers appears to be a requisite of Self Realization. This is old, old stuff. Was just reading in the Mahabharata that the Maharshis are all bickering about everything... 'Those immensely energetic ones performed one rite after another and discussed it among themselves, "This is the right way," "that is not the right way," "there is no other way except this," thus did they speak a lot and argue with each other. Some made weak arguments appear strong. Others cited the sacred texts to make strong arguments appear weak. Some intelligent debaters tore apart the arguments of others, the way hawks fall upon raw pieces of meat thrown in the air...' Sound familiar?
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Nov 11, 2019 22:58:48 GMT -5
Yes, he made many memorable quotes--mostly ascerbic or wryly humorous in nature. "On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." .. "The men the American people admire most extravagantly are the most daring liars; the men they detest most violently are those who try to tell them the truth." "The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it." "The fact is that the average man's love of liberty is nine-tenths imaginary, exactly like his love of sense, justice and truth. He is not actually happy when free; he is uncomfortable, a bit alarmed, and intolerably lonely." "It is the dull man who is always sure, and the sure man who is always dull." .. "It was morality that burned the books of the ancient sages, and morality that halted the free inquiry of the Golden Age and substituted for it the credulous imbecility of the Age of Faith. It was a fixed moral code and a fixed theology which robbed the human race of a thousand years by wasting them upon alchemy, heretic-burning, witchcraft and sacerdotalism." Great stuff! Gotta love it.
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Nov 12, 2019 2:49:08 GMT -5
Sure, many masters do point to the dream as being a reality of sorts, butt it's not realized as that . Well, it's not realized as anything. If it were realized as anything, it would be a thing. The dream is an extremely common pointer. I bet there's some Zen story about this somewhere. Yes, I have agreed that the dream is a pointer that isn't realized . The problem I see however, is that it can create an almighty mess in reflection of what you are that is experiencing the dream .. You see one of the main simple pointers that I have is that there is only what you are, so with the dream model, there is what you are that is dreamy and there requires comparison of that like said .. The president set for a dream world / illusory environment is riddled with knock on effects to that which you are .. This becomes the mess of a multilayered cake and my point is that the set president isn't realized, so the cake base won't support the layers . Some foundations however do support the layers .
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Nov 12, 2019 3:07:49 GMT -5
.. I think 'attack' is your over inflated choice of words, I simply point out that the dream statement is not realized .. I also point out that 'what you are is love' is not realized either butt it's a single layered notion that comes to mind post realization because of what the realization brings to the fore when self awareness is again present . Well, it came to your mind. And your point is?
The idea of the dream is also clearly a pointer. Whatever is realized is beyond words -- so beyond words that it cannot even be said to be beyond words. Actually what is realized destroys even the concept of realization. So how does my position fall down? I haven't truthfully associated anything to what is beyond .. all I have done is point to what comes to mind when there is self awareness of the mind ..Who says simple is better than so-called multi-layered? Doesn't it depend on the circumstance? “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.” I haven't implied that simpler is better, I have simply illustrated what is a single layer pointer and what isn't . Sometimes an in depth explanation is required because the bigger picture is needed to be explained .. Sometimes one word answers will leave another toadally confused .. In light of my conversation with E, where your line of questioning derived, E's model of awareness wasn't simplifying or a single layered cake because of the knock on effects .. For starters the moment you assign what you are as something there is the first layer .. If you don't get drawn into what it is that you are, there is no layer .. The moment you start associating what you are as awareness and that what you are is dreamy, there is the second and so forth . The moment you speak about what you are that is dreamy and aware there requires the comparison of that and there is your third . In regards to there is only what you are and everything is real, you can stack as many layers high as one wishes because the foundation is real .. As many have witnessed, further issues are raised when there are potential figments living amongst real life dudes and such likes, truthful realizations had by dream characters .. it makes no sense based upon their first layer, so you have to have the right foundations in place to support the model. When this is so then peeps might want to look into such a foundation, because it should be speaking for itself compared to lets say other models like the earth is flat for example ..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2019 4:53:22 GMT -5
How much do you want to lay out? I cannae see Mr McDuck letting you use his money fir your wager.
|
|
|
Post by siftingtothetruth on Nov 12, 2019 11:41:45 GMT -5
Well, it's not realized as anything. If it were realized as anything, it would be a thing. The dream is an extremely common pointer. I bet there's some Zen story about this somewhere. Yes, I have agreed that the dream is a pointer that isn't realized . The problem I see however, is that it can create an almighty mess in reflection of what you are that is experiencing the dream .. You see one of the main simple pointers that I have is that there is only what you are, so with the dream model, there is what you are that is dreamy and there requires comparison of that like said .. The president set for a dream world / illusory environment is riddled with knock on effects to that which you are .. This becomes the mess of a multilayered cake and my point is that the set president isn't realized, so the cake base won't support the layers . Some foundations however do support the layers .Well, you keep going back and forth between saying "there is only what you are" is not realized, not Truthy (therefore you don't have to defend the position logically), and is just a pointer... and saying that it is a realized foundation that can "support the layers." Which is it?
|
|
|
Post by siftingtothetruth on Nov 12, 2019 11:45:59 GMT -5
As many have witnessed, further issues are raised when there are potential figments living amongst real life dudes and such likes, truthful realizations had by dream characters .. it makes no sense based upon their first layer, so you have to have the right foundations in place to support the model. Further issues are equally raised when you say "you are all that is," since the statement is meaningless without an understanding (i.e. layers) of "you," "are," "all," and so on. You'll immediately have to build philosophical positions, that, as we've seen, are indefensible. You have to use bizarre things like mind and "beyond mind" and so on that don't make any logical sense if they are really questioned. This is all confusing pointers for the Truth. The Truth is not a verbalizable statement. The Truth is not a foundation upon which you can build statements or not build statements.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2019 17:04:14 GMT -5
.... "The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it." [... Menken quotes ...] Another one... “Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.”
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Nov 13, 2019 3:08:36 GMT -5
As many have witnessed, further issues are raised when there are potential figments living amongst real life dudes and such likes, truthful realizations had by dream characters .. it makes no sense based upon their first layer, so you have to have the right foundations in place to support the model. Further issues are equally raised when you say "you are all that is," since the statement is meaningless without an understanding (i.e. layers) of "you," "are," "all," and so on. You'll immediately have to build philosophical positions, that, as we've seen, are indefensible. You have to use bizarre things like mind and "beyond mind" and so on that don't make any logical sense if they are really questioned. This is all confusing pointers for the Truth. The Truth is not a verbalizable statement. The Truth is not a foundation upon which you can build statements or not build statements. I have said at times the bigger picture is needed and at times I have fully explained my understandings. At times my understandings reveal a layered cake sky high, but that is irrelevant to the point at hand .. I have been pointing out what are single layers and what are not, what are simple pointers and what are not .. I don't see beyond mind as a bizarre statement at all, you seem to inflate stuff in your descriptors , you even made out I was attacking other's that spoke about the dream world reality .. Not sure why your playing your hand like this .. feels like a tactic of yours in order to try and put me down Your lack of understanding of what I mean by mind and no mind is evident here and I have explained myself in regards to all these factors, it really is quite simple to understand if one has the comparison of self and no self and such likes .. This comparison is crucial to my understandings and I have emphasised that it may be difficult to understand if you have no reference, and I answered andy's questions about this, hoping to spread some light on what I am talking about here .. You speak about the Truth where I do not, my pointers are not concerned about the Truth that you believe in .. My pointers are only confusing to you because it doesn't fit in with your model and your beliefs .. If you just read what I say then you will be fine, but you seem to be making stuff up and then inflating and morphing for some reason.
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Nov 13, 2019 3:11:37 GMT -5
Yes, I have agreed that the dream is a pointer that isn't realized . The problem I see however, is that it can create an almighty mess in reflection of what you are that is experiencing the dream .. You see one of the main simple pointers that I have is that there is only what you are, so with the dream model, there is what you are that is dreamy and there requires comparison of that like said .. The president set for a dream world / illusory environment is riddled with knock on effects to that which you are .. This becomes the mess of a multilayered cake and my point is that the set president isn't realized, so the cake base won't support the layers . Some foundations however do support the layers .Well, you keep going back and forth between saying "there is only what you are" is not realized, not Truthy (therefore you don't have to defend the position logically), and is just a pointer... and saying that it is a realized foundation that can "support the layers." Which is it? It is what I have said .. You are stressing over your own model's rules saying that it can't be as I have implied. And again let me emphasise that your model revolves around anything said is false .. So of the mind you are continuing to display a sense of rightness of your model lol, when you are going against the grain of your supposed belief .. This is a prime example of what I mean about some foundations support the theory and some do not and the Truth of that is irrelevant . Do you see that? Forget the Truth, just look at how the model crumbles or not, based upon the foundation of the model. Your foundation is flawed because your foundation is built upon the falsities of the mind and the written word. It is flawed because you are now using a model that is supposedly not false to try and find fault in my model .. It just doesn't work .. My model works because my foundation doesn't revolve around falsities of the mind or the written word, my model doesn't revolve around non aware zombies and dream characters. So my model can encompass a realization of sorts beyond the mind and an understanding of that from of the mind. It cannot be the Truth in reflection of the realization itself but because my model encompasses everything that Is Self that is real there can be some meaningful pointers that come to mind .. Some pointers like said are more appropriate than other's .. Some more simple than other's, Some less layered than other's .. You only need to look at the foundation of a peeps model and then see how many layers you can stack upon it until it topples over . Your model can't be stacked more than ankle high at the very most because everything you say is supposedly false .. You can't even argue or defend that foundation because anything you say about it will be false. This has always been as problematic as the dream model is for nothing is real or can encompass anything Truthful.
|
|
|
Post by siftingtothetruth on Nov 13, 2019 10:45:57 GMT -5
Further issues are equally raised when you say "you are all that is," since the statement is meaningless without an understanding (i.e. layers) of "you," "are," "all," and so on. You'll immediately have to build philosophical positions, that, as we've seen, are indefensible. You have to use bizarre things like mind and "beyond mind" and so on that don't make any logical sense if they are really questioned. This is all confusing pointers for the Truth. The Truth is not a verbalizable statement. The Truth is not a foundation upon which you can build statements or not build statements. I have said at times the bigger picture is needed and at times I have fully explained my understandings. At times my understandings reveal a layered cake sky high, but that is irrelevant to the point at hand .. I have been pointing out what are single layers and what are not, what are simple pointers and what are not .. I don't see beyond mind as a bizarre statement at all, you seem to inflate stuff in your descriptors , you even made out I was attacking other's that spoke about the dream world reality .. Not sure why your playing your hand like this .. feels like a tactic of yours in order to try and put me down Pure projection. Has nothing to do with you and everything to do with your position. But one's "comparison of self and no self" is logical spaghetti, as we've seen when I've tried to get you to explain it. You yourself have admitted these statements about no self are mindful and not realized. So which is it? It's not that it's difficult to understand, it's that it makes no logical sense. This would be fine if you were ok with other people's positions also making no logical sense and being based on having the right "reference," but you are happy to attack other people's positions based on logic, but defend your positions based on "reference."
|
|
|
Post by siftingtothetruth on Nov 13, 2019 10:55:48 GMT -5
Well, you keep going back and forth between saying "there is only what you are" is not realized, not Truthy (therefore you don't have to defend the position logically), and is just a pointer... and saying that it is a realized foundation that can "support the layers." Which is it? It is what I have said .. You are stressing over your own model's rules saying that it can't be as I have implied. No, I'm not using my model's rules. I'm using the way you critique other people's models. You say "explain it to me, I don't understand" -- and then you try to find logical contradiction. When in fact they are resting on a reference to what is beyond mind. Now, when I critique YOUR model that way, you do the exact same thing that you critique in others. You say "you're not going to understand without a reference." But somehow that is ok, but other people's doing that is not. The model is no better than anyone else's because you can't explain it logically without saying "you need a reference for Truth" to understand. Thus the model "encompasses" nothing. No one needs a model for Truth that depends on having the Truth realization to validate it. I'd argue the model is worse, since "you are all that is" is a pretty ineffective pointer.
|
|